0:07 OK, so, I'm thank you for joining our meeting today. My name is Nicole became, I'm the Vice President of Community Partnerships and Chicago. And I'll be advancing the slides today, and I'll be presenting some sections, But I know we've gone through these housekeeping slides before, but it's always just good for people, We do have some new people on today, and the attendee rule, and so, just want to clarify how this meeting works for everyone. So, if you're a ... 0:32 board member, we tried to promote you to be a panelist, and that way, you can mute and unmute yourself, if you're on the phone to mute and unmute, you need to push star six, and that will allow you to speak. 0:46 Um, and if you are not calling in, you can use the mute and unmute button on the go to webinar pane there. 0:56 There's a place on the slide that kind of shows you where that is. If you're new to this technology, to see board members who are maybe joining by phone and are having issues with being able to mute and unmute, just send me an e-mail. I'll try to monitor that throughout and see if we can troubleshoot. And the non board members will remain on mute until the public comment section, which is at the end of the agenda today. 1:19 So, board members are able to use the chat box for comments, and those comments, think we'll be seen by everybody, if you send them to the entire audience, If you only send them to organizers and panelists, it stays between the board. 1:33 So, and we encourage everybody to, to be open and transparent, and send messages to everyone, if that's appropriate. And then, for non board members, you can use the questions box to submit any comments. 1:47 We typically don't address comments that are in there, but, in particular, if you're a non board member, and you want to speak during the public comment section, that's where you would indicate that you have something to say. And then we reserve time at the end to have you make comments. 2:03 Um, so, I hope that makes sense. And we'll remind you again how to do that throughout the session today. 2:12 So, then I'll turn it over to you to say, Hi, and then I'm going to just look at the roll call quickly and see if we're at a quorum and we can report out who's on. 2:23 That sounds good. Thanks, Nicole. Welcome to everybody. This is our sixth and final board meetings for 2020. This will be my last meeting as Chair. 2:35 Turn the reins over, *** the beginning of this year. 2:39 Just a reminder, that we're going to use the public comment period as we have in the past, at the end of the meeting, agenda for guest comments, and keep the discussion between board members as much as possible as we move through the agenda. 2:55 That introduction for today, and I know, Nicole, that you are working on that. 3:00 Roll call and quorum calculation, or how are we doing on that? 3:07 I think we're a quorum, that's do you want to just quickly read out who we have lumped in as online and we'll see if we missed anyone. 3:15 Of course, We've got in terms of board members pregnant Dorothy empty, Robert Cunningham Cunningham, Michael Banghart. Sannyasis, FinCEN can brunette temper. 3:29 Debbie Resnick, Christie crawl, Civil Madison, Mary Howard. 3:34 Richardson been an obligate, Hormel Barbaro, Virginia, Freeman Hodges, Clay Mahoney on behalf of Commissioner Navarro, and then Carolyn. 3:47 It does not count towards the form. 3:50 Are some new folks who have popped in, so we are over quorum, but seeing seeing the folks over here like Chancellor, who is also on the Board, who's in there? So we'll make sure to catch everyone. 4:03 Great. And it looks like we have only see an SPC reps on now that Richard joined, so we don't need any of the alternates to step into a voting role today. 4:15 So, I think we're good. 4:18 Great. 4:20 So, with that, we can then move right into our agenda, which starts with our consent agenda. Everybody should have their agenda in the board package. 4:28 Today's consent agenda includes the The October Board Minutes, Executive Committee, board Affairs committee, and the SOP EC Committee Reports, as well as the all Chicago Report, As is our practice. 4:45 If any member wants to pull any of these items from the consent agenda, it will be removed and placed on the regular meeting agenda, or an independent discussion. 4:57 And if there, does, anyone who would like to pull any of these items off the consent agenda, I'm going to pause for a few seconds and see if anyone wants to raise their hand in the church, or mentioned in the chat. 5:14 Um, I'm sorry, I'm not sure how to do this. 5:17 I'd like, Chicago report to too, B, taking our agenda report, if there's time. 5:28 Tripp fruits. 5:32 OK, so, Jonah can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think, uh. 5:40 We will pull that item's without that's all that's needed and put it on the regular agenda. 5:50 Um, so, if. 5:54 If there are no other requests. 6:00 Then, I will ask if there is anyone who objects to the consent agenda with the modification that Fred made by pulling the old Chicago report, any objections? 6:15 So, it's not the consent agenda is now approved. Nicolle, I will leave it to you as to whether you want to. 6:22 Would you like to give the Alex Chicago Report highlights now, or would you like to do it after the primary presentation today? 6:33 Hmm. 6:34 I think if we could get through the main voting items to prioritize those, because I don't think there's a voting item on the Chicago report. 6:45 That wouldn't be my preference, OK. 6:48 So let's There are any objections to, to Nicole's suggestion. The chair wood will do that. We will add it after the primary voting items that are already on the agenda. 7:03 So Nicole, I think I can turn it back now to you for our first item, which is the modifications, the proposed implementation, structure, discussion. 7:15 Yeah, I think so. There was a motion for discussion brought by the executive committee and they're recommending that the CRC Board vote to affirm the CLC Implementation structure lines of action for 2021, as approved by the CRC board executive committee. So, there's been information in the packet about this, and most of all of you have participated in a presentation. 7:40 So, I won't put everybody through that again, but I did get some comments asking for us to kind of remind people what the process and opportunities for input, and then I am happy to just share with you my impressions of what the public comments, like, a summary of the public comments and our responses. 7:59 But for transparency purposes, we did kind of published this morning for you, all the full public comments that were received along with some thoughts about those. 8:08 And I'm happy to go in deeper. So maybe I'll just take two minutes to do the quick updates and then open. 8:14 I'll turn it back to you all to see where you're at and what questions you might have. 8:19 So we started this process, I would say, in the middle of 20 20, looking at the, the CFC implementation structure with a community survey. We had a lot of response and we published a report summarizing the results. 8:34 Around that same time, we were holding community focus groups and focus groups with the CRC Board. 8:39 And so, um. 8:43 Am I the only one who's not getting the slide updates, because we're still on the consent agenda? 8:47 Oh, I'm so sorry, hold on, let me just double check, that says it's paused, so There we go. Now you're on camera. 8:56 OK, so sorry about that, thanks for interrupting. 8:59 So the, after we did the survey, the focus groups, and the focus groups with the board, Chicago spent a lot of time of synthesizing that information and then, started meeting with five sessions with the brain trust of the implementation structure. So, that's all of the project managers, of the current lines of action. And we met with them several times. And although we didn't sort of finalize all of the details for how it's going to operate, we did feel like we came to consensus around the proposed line of action. 9:36 So then, our Chicago tried to take those lines of action, but a little bit of context around it, in terms of how we think it could operate and open to that for a public comment period. 9:47 And then we also held strategy sessions to get feedback. And so, what I wanted to share today was a brief synthesis of the public feedback and concerns we've received. 10:00 So, well, I am pretty confident in saying that it doesn't seem like there are concerns about the lines of action that are being proposed. 10:11 Most of the comments in the strategy sessions or in the survey, expressed concerns about where do special populations fit, the ability of affinity groups, groups to staff themselves. And then, especially yesterday, when I met with SPC, where does advocacy live? And what role does advocacy have to play in our CRC? 10:30 And then, of course, there were a lot of comments, which is rightly so expressed about, you know, the devil's in the details, but we want to see more of how this is operationalized. And in particular, people were interested in how new lines of action could come about, or how we know lines and action have completed their work and should kind of retired to be affinity groups. And then how are affinity groups determined? And so, on. Chicago laid out a proposal, in our response to public comments, I'd be happy to go through in more detail, if people would like. 11:01 But that's all very drafty, and we would look to the community to help us firm up that process starting in early 2021, if this is approved by the board today. 11:14 So, I will stop there and just see here what questions people have, or if there's any comments or concerns people want to share. 11:25 This is Fred, and maybe I missed it, and some of them really meetings. What's the definition of affinity group? 11:34 I know you said that. 11:36 It mentioned that there's concern about affinity group, staffing themselves, But what's the definition of an entity group? 11:43 How are they created? 11:46 Thank you. 11:48 Yeah, so, um, it is complex friends, so even if you sat through a meeting, you might still need a reminder. 11:53 So, um, we're, we're thinking, affinity groups would be the way that all of the other work that is not a line of action or a lead agency role, you know, that has like an MOU with the CRC Board. But there's still people that meet to do work. That's considered an affinity group. So it's, it's groups that typically form around a special population or around similar program models or around concerns that are the same. So some examples of affinity groups that we think already exist would be like the Veterans Leadership Team or some of the groups related to youth or the charge group would be, you know, classified as an affinity group. 12:36 And how are they created? 12:41 For the most part, affinity groups already exist. And so they would just sort of register and say hey we are an affinity group and we're going to be doing work to help the EOC achieve its goals. 12:53 I think some groups could new groups could form Because a group of concerned people come together and say they want to they want to be a group. 13:03 So the process we are thinking about in terms of registration would be a quick form filled out online, just saying, who is the point of contact, and then we would make sure that the goal is aligned with the COC's strategic performance goals. And as long as there's a direct tie, then it would be considered an affinity group. 13:25 We've also made sure that we're not, we're not the complete that at atia cargo, and so there's, there would be a process to sort of, say, raise your hand if you want to talk with the executive committee or with other board members, too. 13:38 Thanks, you. 13:41 I call this is Christy Crawl from. I'm from Crown Philanthropy is I just. 13:45 I just really want to commend you for taking what felt to me like a highly unwieldy structure and streamlining it into these very approachable but really meaningful and transformational lines of action. 13:59 I just, I worry for a long time. 14:01 I admit as a board member, that I had a very difficult time tracking what was happening. Any action agenda, and it felt like such a dereliction of duty on my part as a board member. 14:12 Because I just, I couldn't keep track of it all and this just feels like a much more digestible way to take complex and urgently needed action plans and and direct them in a way that I think is going to be more substantive. That's going to allow for deepen engagement on the part of stakeholders and really help deliver optimal impacts for the sector. So I just, I tip my hat to you and everyone who had a role in this, this conversion process. 14:43 And I do think that AI is sort of narrowed scope is going to allow us to go deeper into these spaces and affect more transformation within them. So thank you. 15:02 All right, this is Lisa Moore: some Butler, I apologize. I had another meeting. 15:05 I've only been on the call for a minute. 15:09 Don't want to back anybody up in terms of covering anything. I may have missed that. Nicole wanted you to know that I'm on the phone, so maybe you can let me know kinda where we are in the discussion. 15:21 Yeah, absolutely! 15:23 Oh, good! 15:24 I was just going to say, I think Lee said that There's a motion on the table right now, brought forth by the executive committee to affirm the implementation structure lines of action for 2021 as a as approved by the executive committee. And we're in the discussion phase at this point. 15:43 OK. 15:46 Hi, this is from the network. I had a question about the affinity groups if we can just jump back to that real quick. 15:54 Nichole, you provided an outline of some examples of affinity groups, is that to indicate that folks who might receive specialized services or be considered a subgroup of the general homeless population would need to have an affinity group to kind of guide their work streams. Is that what would be recommended? 16:14 Just kind of caught my attention when you labeled veterans as an affinity group. 16:22 Yeah. 16:23 I know that, I love the way she talks about affinity groups, so feel free to jump in an answer. 16:30 You want me to, to? So I think I think the answer is both yes and no to that question. 16:35 I think, you know, it's affinity groups aren't intended to be served, a gatekeeper or prevented. You don't have to be an affinity group to sort of get the attention of the continuum. 16:48 You don't have to be an affinity group to have meetings with and serve Nicole and I, as the lead implementation structure, folks, it's not intended to stop folks access. 17:00 But rather, it's intended to to really acknowledge and honor when groups have come together and are doing sort of the thoughtful work together and mobilizing within the community, around a population, where what they're saying is we want to make sure that we have an ongoing through line with the implementation structure with a continuum that we're not yet, at the point, necessarily as sort of being a line of action. That's about the board and the continuum strategic direction, but that we think there are really ongoing, intentional work that, that needs to happen. And we want to make sure that there is that through wine and more intensity of collaboration, then. Perhaps if you origin affinity group like ad, hoc one-off meetings where they're sort of crossover between the continuum and that sort of other sector. 17:50 So I think, you know, we, we shared as the example of veterans, And I think there's some other groups that, as served, populations that we would imagine being in that category. 17:59 And you felt it was more to sort of help folks understand, and, like, oh, I can imagine what that looks like, because I can see the parallel, But not necessarily. 18:09 Theater is definitely not intended to be like, if you're not an affinity group, suddenly don't get to talk to the CRC at all with that, if that helps at all. 18:22 If I could. 18:25 one of the things that that I'm a little wasn't there, So let me start here. 18:33 My team first heard about this in an October meeting. 18:39 And so, I'm sure that that our colleagues at all Chicago have done everything they could to try to socialize this bus. 18:47 To tell you the truth, we were a little. 18:51 We were a little preoccupied in October trying to get ready for our own budget hearing and for the budget process in anticipation of how challenging that might be this year, and it was challenging. 19:02 So, um, between the budget process and our work on the pandemic, which all of all of us are doing together don't want to make it seem like the FSS is uniquely struggling with pandemic. I know we all are. 19:18 Bottom line is, I don't feel like my team and I have really had an opportunity to understand how we will operationalize this. 19:25 DFS, aes, literally structures so much of this work. 19:30 And as you all know, when I announced recently that, for instance, morrice position because she had been promoted, they looked at what Mora does to support the work and all Chicago would be changing for almost two years. 19:43 The FSS gave almost 50% of Morris time to the process that resulted in the action agenda. 19:52 The FSS is neither wedded to the action agenda as a thing that needs to be carved in stone, nor are we wedded to a certain number of agenda action groups, but we spent two years, um, along with all of you and a process that resulted in the action engine. 20:13 A process that was led by an independent third party that was shaped by national best practices that included an awful lot of, of meetings And. 20:24 And so I say all of that to say that that resulted in us making very specific decisions here at DFS, about structure on our own time. 20:35 In order to support that work, What I would like to do is to have time to really be able to sit my team and the all Chicago team and understand the implications of this for the way that we are structured in the way that we approach our work. 20:52 And so I do not, I'm not prepared today to support this, because what I would like to do is I would like to have time to dig into this a little bit more with, between my, my team and the team at Chicago. 21:07 I have some real questions about this that, um, I believe all of this can be worked out. As I say, I am not against change And I am not against changing structure but I do need to understand the impact that this will have on the FSS. 21:26 This is tricky, because I want to understand what you just said. Are you asking that this, that we vote on this today, and that we put it aside for say that our next board meeting? 21:38 Yes. If that's your motion and a second to your motion? 21:42 Yes, sir, that is what I'm asking. 21:45 So, now we have an end. 21:47 Forgive me, Jones. Now we are done, now we'll have a discussion on your emotion. 21:54 Is that your postcard? 21:56 Yeah, OK, thanks. 21:59 Lisa, is that here? Are you making that motion? 22:02 Yes, sir. I'm making that motion, and I apologize. OK, and now, Fred, I believe, is second to that Motion now. We'll open it up for discussion on that motion? 22:12 Correct. 22:13 So, that's what, Matthew. 22:16 So, I will recall this, How does that delay stop them up over four goals of justice for 2021? 22:30 because if I'm understanding that, not the February. 22:37 Yeah. I mean, we can always schedule a special board meeting, of course, in January to talk about this. 22:44 And, you know, I don't want to unnecessarily expedite something, and at the same time, the tension we sit with is that everything is urgent and to move to any systems. 22:55 Change is like us. It can be a slow process, and so to start sooner than later would be. 23:03 Maybe, but I totally hear what the Commissioners. And so, just to give people an idea of what we think the timeline would be, like if it passed day in January, We'd start reaching out to recruit, to establish leadership teams for each of the lines of action. 23:18 And then, those would probably meet in quarter one to establish the goals of what that line of action would be working on. 23:26 And, if you feel like if we don't vote until January, February, it just pushes us back a quarter which, it's up to the group term. 23:36 Decide what that might have. 23:40 Nichole, how much of the process that you outlined the July through today process would be repeated. 23:49 Do you feel as a part of this delay? 23:53 Or is it just just going to become a board member or at this point? 23:58 I don't think, I mean, unless. 24:02 It's awesome. 24:04 It doesn't seem the concerns that have been expressed to us from the FSIS would really, the lines of action, necessarily. And so, I don't think we would have to go through the committee process. 24:17 And, in fact, I would ask the board to consider, know, asking the commissioner, how she would feel about, going forward with the lines of actually knowing. There's still a lot of work to be figured out and we've been working to set up a meeting in January when we meet with GFS twice a week now anyway. 24:37 And so not I'm not sure if if we would need to go through a community process again to clinicians help us move forward. 24:48 Yeah. 24:54 Yes? 24:59 Yes. 25:04 Can't hear. 25:06 Yeah. 25:08 You sound a little like, like, Yeah. 25:13 Love your voice, yeah. 25:16 You can. Yeah. 25:20 Oh, yeah. 25:27 Try Calling, and if that's OK Yeah, this is, this is Richard. Just a quick question. 25:31 So, Nicole, if there was a delay, would that prevent you or, or, very, at, what would prevent you from still reaching out, assuming that there would be a vote, and a special vote in January, and the, all of the lines, stay the same, reaching out to folk, to feel those, to see if there's interest for, you know, leadership or whatever that would be? 26:04 Is there anything that would prevent you from doing that? That's what I'm asking. 26:09 I don't think I would want to redirect our staff's efforts towards something has not been voted on by the board. 26:23 I would just like to speak up on behalf of the DV community, and, you know, obviously, as a board, we've spent significant amount of time, as Nicole knows, and several other people on the call know. 26:35 Trying to co-ordinate, you know, the release of domestic violence, housing, or housing for domestic violence survivors. That addresses sort of their full experience. 26:44 And that's been an enormous amount of, of, kind of co-ordinating work because of the lack of alignment between all Chicago ... and de FSS. 26:55 And it really has been an experience that's left me feeling like I'm just bouncing between one system and another, or three parts of the same system, And getting mixed answers. 27:04 So, if the commissioner feels that she needs time to bring her staff on board with this plan, are to discuss this plan with them, or to to realign de FSS systems to accommodate what this plan is recommending. 27:18 I think we really should listen to that, because from a lived experience perspective, for domestic violence survivors who need housing, the lack of alignment is a roadblock. 27:28 While I, I like the plan, I think it's a good plan and would support it. 27:33 I think the plan is going to be hampered if the execution of it is sporadic, or uneven or delayed. 27:42 So I think what we have to keep a kind of a focus on is how it was, that's going to affect someone who needs housing in the City of Chicago. And I think right now, a lack of system alignment, and a lack of system co-ordination is a barrier to housing. 27:58 And I think if the commissioner, again, my understanding commissioner from your statement, was that you would need time to make sure that you guys could roll this out effectively and if that's what you need, I think that's in the best interest of folks who need housing. 28:12 Yeah, I'd like to hear from anyone who might speak in opposition to this motion. 28:18 Otherwise, I think we might be able to forward. 28:23 Good morning, this is tough for. 28:26 I guess I don't want to lose some of the other discussion that was happening about the, some of the, especially the community issues that were raised beyond just delay And I feel like if we vote now to simply delay that we won't necessarily get to those either today and that it's not clear in the future. And I think specifically around the point about advocacy. I think that's something that bears discussion with this board and where that lives, whether it's a line of action or where else. Oh, lives. 28:58 So, I be very interested in having that discussion today, as part of this analysis of what the new implementation structure will be. Let me suggest this, just as a point of procedure. We have a motion to. 29:16 Delays this conversation, may delay the motion until next meeting. 29:22 I don't think that, to your point, keeps us from coming back and spending some amount of time on the substance of the prior discussion. Yeah. So, it's a effect. 29:35 If someone wanted to make a motion to call the question, to end the debate on the delay, we could end Nicole. 29:43 If you think our schedule allows spend a few more minutes on the proposed structure restructuring. 29:54 Does that make sense to everyone? 29:58 Just so that I understand what you just said, and particularly talk about where you see lives in the proposed, like, new location structures. 30:10 Is that right? 30:12 Yeah, we'd come back to that discussion, OK, thank you. 30:18 So is there a motion to end the debate on vote and vote on the motion at hand? 30:26 I think this is Richard. 30:28 I think that if there was a way, to, to Pete's point, to have those other discussions, because I think that might help us. 30:42 Have this discussion, or decide on this motion, having that other, having the rest of that discussion, if that makes sense. 30:54 And I don't know procedurally how to go about that without tabling or, or ending this, and having this boat. 31:04 OK, I was just thinking. 31:07 Yeah. 31:08 Sorry, I was just going to check that Jones. I mean if we, if we call the chin to. Come back to this motion. Someone could remake this. Motion is, right? Or No. 31:20 First of all, you'd need to if you put that motion to close the floor you need a two thirds vote to adopt it OK but if you just postpone that motion until the next meeting, you can have that discussion then but it stops everything that you're doing right now. 31:38 If you if you want to postpone, that ends the discussion unless somebody wants to reconsider it. 31:46 So what is it you want to do? You'll want to have discussion today in the boat? 31:53 No, I think people want I'm sorry. I've been, you should go ahead. 31:56 So, I think what we're trying to do is, we are going to, I believe the commissioner has made a motion, two. 32:06 Take this current implementation, structure, proposal, and delay that decision until our next meeting. 32:16 OK, we'd like to reserve some time to discuss the substance of the proposed implementation structure. 32:23 So I guess what I was trying to accomplish was if there is no objection, so the notion that we're going to, as a Board ultimately make a decision on any changes to the lines of action structure, we should agree to that. 32:39 Then we can, the Board can continue to discuss the substance of some of the points that have previously been raised. 32:48 Aye. 32:49 That's OK, OK. Well, we'll be at the next meeting. 32:53 Right, OK. 32:58 So there's a motion by the commissioner to delay a vote on the proposed changes, in the structure for the lines of action. 33:06 until the next meeting, I believe it was seconded by. 33:11 All right. 33:14 Is there any further discussion on that motion? 33:22 OK, at that point, Joan, I think we can call the question, you don't need to call the question because nobody's seeking recognition, so just you both vote on the vote until the next meeting. The discussion was not included in that motion. 33:40 So if you want to continue discussing it, but it's the book that's postponed until the next meeting? 33:46 Yes, OK. 33:47 So, any objection to the postponement of the vote on this revised structure, any objections to the? Asking, is there any further discussion because if there is none debate is close, you don't always need a motion to close if there is no discussion. 34:08 Yeah. OK I thought I asked that question. Any further discussion on the motion? 34:12 If not, are there any objects objection to the motion that's been made and seconded? 34:19 Nichole, I'll wait for you to tell me. 34:21 Yeah. 34:25 So, if not, this is Carmelo I would be I would be interested to hear from the folks to have expressed concerns or questions about how advocacy will be treated in the structure. 34:39 I think we should now come back to the substance, like the proposed structural changes, for however long, Nicole, you think we have to have that conversation. 34:49 But have you taken the need to take the vote, to postpone it? 34:55 Do you want to have the discussion? 34:58 So, that's noted, and then vote on moving action on it till the next meeting. That's what I was concerned about, given. That objection, but all those in favor? 35:14 AI? 35:16 Aye. 35:17 Hi. 35:19 five? 35:20 Oh. Hi. 35:23 Uh. 35:24 Hi. 35:26 Any opposed? 35:29 Aye. 35:30 Yes. 35:32 Any opposed? 35:34 Nay. 35:36 one minute, one day. 35:40 So the motion passes. 35:47 Would just summarize what the action of the motion is, so everyone's clear, what's the boogeyman I'll try. 35:54 OK, I take the motion, was to delay a vote on the proposed sampling rates and structure lines of action. 36:06 Everybody heard it, we can now, I believe, have continued discussion on some of the questions that were previously raised. Nichole. 36:18 OK, this is Debbie Resnick, I'm sorry, can you hear me now? 36:23 Yes, Yeah. 36:24 Can I just make one suggestion before you move on to the discussion, which is that? 36:30 Could, could the Executive Committee or the Chair of the Board participate in some of those conversations with all chicagoans with CFS? 36:44 If that's your motion, I'll second. 36:47 I think it's a process question. I don't know. Lisa suggested that dialog. 36:53 Nichole or Visa, is there any objection to every board representation in that? 36:59 Congress had those conversations. 37:03 In hearing from Debby, why she thinks that's important, it's not necessarily something that we do. 37:09 I'm simply trying to understand how I'm going to operationalize and staff this work, that hasn't been the kind of thing that traditionally the board sat in on. 37:18 So, and by the way, if you'd like I said, we're not trying to get in the way of change. I'm trying to understand the impact of change. And I've asked just for a break, so I can do that. 37:29 My folks have already reached out to all Chicago to get that meeting schedule so we can move this forward. So I'm not against it, I'm just trying to understand, like, to what end. 37:39 Sure. 37:40 The purpose of my suggestion was that as I understand it, the executive committee need to approve the lines of action and if the discussion between the backpack and ASA cargo is about what the line of action should be. 37:56 It feels to me that there should be board representation if the discussion between Chicago and the FFR is about operationalizing work together. And it doesn't seem that the board needs to be involved. But then it doesn't seem that the conversation would be about what the lines of action are. 38:14 Um, So that was what my thinking was. 38:18 Hope that makes sense, and thank you. We are really looking to understand the impact of this on our work and our relationship with our Chicago. 38:26 We are not trying to stand in the way of change. 38:29 As I said, we were not necessarily whetted to the action agenda. No one ever intended for it to be carved in stone In its present form. We simply want to understand how we're supposed to work differently. The ramifications for us are significant. 38:45 And so I anticipate that the majority of our conversation will be around those specific things that go to our abilities to staff, and structure, and embrace any of these changes based on the fact that, for us, staffing, and structuring those kinds of things take us time. 39:04 So it's hard for us to pivot quickly, but I'm not against whoever wants to be a part of those discussions. 39:13 Yeah. Sounds good. 39:15 I would just recommend that if the discussions move to from operationalizing work together, to what the lines of action should be, then the Chair of the Board could participate in some of those conversations. That would be my recommendation. 39:32 That would be fine And more than happy to follow up with you number one, once we get the meeting scheduled to see whether or not it works for, for you or for anybody else. 39:47 Sounds good. Thank you. 39:48 Thank you. 39:49 Hi, this is like Christine, Hailey Cook County. Breaking up Chris thing. 40:04 That's one of the pieces for next time, for the next meeting, would be, could we see if there are pieces of the action agenda that are coming off? 40:14 Just maybe a slide that talks about, these are the these are the pieces of work that are coming out of the action agenda, and this is where they are going, or they've been completed. So, it's clear so that we understand where the work has transitioned to, as as a request for approval moves forward. 40:38 If you didn't hear that, I can put it in the chat. 40:41 We have that, Christine. I'm happy I can send it. 40:44 Then, now, I mean, of course, a lot of the decisions why, with the leadership teams within the lines of action, about where stuff will sit, and what we're asking everybody to do is to prioritize work going forward, not try to fit all of the work in. And so, we're not the ones to make that decision. 41:00 But within the leadership structure of each line of action, there will have to be some prioritization discussions, and, sort of, the decision making will end there, But I have an outline of what we think could happen that some of the Service Providers Commission have, has asked for, and can share it with the group. 41:31 Open for other comments and questions. Discussion. 41:37 So, this is Richard. I don't know if this would apply here. But I am hoping that we can be intentional about having a meeting, to someone's point earlier, about the next meeting being in February. Could we have, or be intentional about having a special meeting in January? 42:08 I don't know that there's any. 42:10 I guess the first question I would ask, given, the holidays upcoming is a question for Nicola, at least as to whether you're going to be have been able to organize whatever sessions you'll need in order to have anything ready for the board to consider. 42:28 In January, don't think we'll be able to meet with with TFS as until January. This, I'm not sure how many sessions you think it would take to kinda work through this. 42:41 Know, none of us have a lot of time, so I'm really hoping. 42:44 Forgot much, which is why Nicole, as you saw yesterday, I was trying to really make sure that I had all the right folks from my team there so that we could maximize on it. And to Nicole's point. Because it's December 16th. 42:58 And a lot of our folks due to the pandemic haven't taken any time off all year. We do have a number of people that will be out around the holiday. We are rushing to get this meeting scheduled because we are eager to understand. 43:12 Um? 43:16 With Richard, I think, you're the succeeding chairs. I'll leave it to you, but it feels a little bit to me, like January. It might be the one that's going to be the month. 43:27 Know, I see that, and I fully understand that, but just just FYI, there may be a meeting at the end of January maybe. 43:39 Especially, and what I can do, is, as soon as we can get it scheduled, as I said, my assistant is working on that right now, We've been e-mailing in the last 24 hours, as soon as we get it scheduled. 43:53 I will share that, that meeting schedule there with you. And obviously, all Chicago, India, FSIS will know. 43:59 And if that, then, helps us get something on for late January, in terms of, a board meeting, or something like that, you know, I'm not against that, we're trying to get it scheduled. 44:11 Appreciate it. 44:19 Any other comments or feedback that folks would like to provide now on this topic before we move to the next voting? 44:28 I'm sorry, I thought we were going to have a discussion on the advocacy issue. Did I misunderstand that we're in it now? So go ahead, OK? Thank you. So, thanks. 44:47 Oh. 44:54 Peter, sorry, I brought it up earlier so I can bring it back up again. 45:00 But this was a major point of discussion at the Service Providers Commission meeting yesterday and I think that it is something that, I've had conversations with a number of board members about even before the new implementation structure. 45:16 But I think that, at least from the service provider community, we, you know, there's been different ways that there's been structured advocacy within the CRC, or as part of the CRC, you know, the recent past. 45:33 And I think we understand that, based on the current proposal, that Chicago doesn't feel like they have the capacity to lead that. 45:44 We do feel that it's a critical component of achieving our ends, and trying to meet the, the goals that we've set for ourselves. 45:53 Especially, as we look over the last couple of years, of how, you know, we've created a pipeline group that has laid out projections that's tracked the creation of new units. And beyond what's come from the cares Act, We've really struggled to create new housing. And we all have agreed on multiple occasions that new housing and new resources is critical to our overall vision, of trying to ensure that everyone has a home and community. So I think the question that we have is, if not as part of this implementation structure, where does it live? And I know that we may not come to a final answer about that, but I think it's something that we need to discuss as a board. 46:45 This is Fred. I'm raising my hand again. Thanks. 47:00 And I think Fred asked if it was OK for him to speak. 47:04 Sorry, I was on mute. OK, so this is, of course, one of my hobby horses, so, forgive me, I think, as part of the advocacy, what we, what I wanted to do, and I think I can speak for the rest of the board affairs committee. 47:24 And for the people who participated in the process of revising the charter is that one of the ways, and it's only a single arrow in the quiver is to vastly increase the number of people and organizations who are members of the CFC. So, we are now 100 or 150. 47:48 If we were 500 or one thousand, that would allow advocacy, That's one of the places where it should be done. 47:59 And not only it is not just that, we're 250. But it is a very insular. The membership is, is largely insular. 48:07 It is largely people who get money are people who give money to us, or people have lived experience and homelessness, but it is not really representative of a broader swath of the world. 48:21 So, my suggestion would be, are my sink, Right? 48:27 My hope is that we use the members meeting that is coming up on Friday. 48:35 We as future members meeting as a way of generating vaseline or support for gathering additional resources. 48:47 And, again, if it's anybody on the board affairs committee, misrepresenting position. Let me know. 48:55 Feel free to disagree with me. 48:59 Thank you. 49:07 Any other comments? 49:17 If not, let's leave Nicole. 49:21 We are moving to emotion, brought by the affairs committee to the 2021, or it's late. 49:33 That executive committee, that's right, Ously, it's in your packet. 49:38 I believe it's pages 13, or it didn't mean. 49:44 Yeah. 49:48 Great, and if anyone from the board affairs committee wants to give any background, you know, please do so, but otherwise, I'll let people kinda review the slate and see if you have any questions that I can address. 50:02 And, of course, if the culture to address them, I'll be glad to try to address them. Awesome. 50:08 Is the Chair of the board affairs committee. 50:18 Are there are there's slides, or is this the slide that we're, we're still on? 50:23 No, I did not make slides, OK, OK, no worries I just wanted to see if my computer frills. 50:30 Now, note your or that or maybe that I'm not sharing the right thing no, It's just in the packet Richard thing. 50:38 Can you just tell us, read the names of the people who will be on the executive committee. 50:43 That might, lots of discussion. 50:46 Yeah. I mean, I can also pull them up, which I would have to do anyway, to read it. So, let me just do that really quick. 51:07 Did you say just the executive committee or the whole board? 51:09 Right, what are we voting on. 51:13 Both were voting on the executive committee, or are we voting on the whole slate? for voting? 51:19 Yeah, it's under them together, so let's go ahead and list every show everyone. 51:31 OK, so, are people seeing? 51:35 Yes. 51:36 Right, so we have Amanda ... with the network, ..., Youth Action Board, Ben Applegate with applegate, Thompson, Camilla Borough, Urban Labs, who is also an executive committee member because he's the Chair of .... Carolyn Ross is the Collaborative Applicant Non-voting Member with the Chicago. Christine Haley Cook County Health, Christy ... with Chrome Family Philanthropies. Debbie Resnick with Polk Brothers. 51:59 She's also an executive committee member and the Secretary of this proposal passes through the NC with Lived Experience Commission for freedmen with Lived Experience Commission, who is also on the Executive Committee. because he's the Board Affairs Committee Chair with ..., with Christian Community Health Center, who was voted by the Service Providers Commission, to be the vice chair, next year, and then the Chair in 20 22. 52:25 Based on how our charter rotation works, we have Lisa Morrison Butler with Department of Family and Supportive Services, who's on the executive committee because there's a slot saved for the ESG representative. Have Commissioner Navarro with Chicago Department of Housing, Mary Howard with Chicago Housing Authority. Megan Cunningham will be back in 20 21 as the representative for the Chicago Department of Public Health, Michael Banghart with rooms on Social Services, who's on the Executive Committee as the Finance Chair. 52:55 So he's also the Treasurer have picked up for Center for Housing and Health, Regina for each Treatment Hodges, with Jesse .... Richard Rowe with the Lived Experience Commission who was voted by Elysee to be chair next year, Robert Cunningham with Elysee, Saeed Richardson, was Samuel DeWitt Proctor conference who were at we're asking to add to the executive committee and he's agreed. It passes today. Some distance in with Matthew House, Steve Brown, with spicy Civil Madison with the mayor's office, and Todd Fuller with Illinois Department of Human Services. 53:34 Thank you. 53:36 You're welcome. 53:38 OK, So this motion has been brought forward by the Board Affairs committee, which means I don't believe it needs a second, Is it, at this point? Any further discussion? 53:57 OK, if not. 54:01 Motioned, having been brought forward by the board Affairs committee. 54:07 Joan, just to make it easy. I'm going to ask if there are any objecting to this. Correct. 54:16 If not, if not the motion passes. 54:20 Correct. 54:21 There I did it right OK, it's at this point. 54:33 I think we can move on the call. 54:38 Great. 54:38 So, I'm sorry, I just want to thank you again for your leadership, and I know there was some of that in the chat, but it's been, you know, a challenging time, and you've done a terrific job, and we're just so grateful for your support. 54:57 Uh, thanks. Thanks, Debbie, as I've said all along. 55:03 You're here. 55:04 Aye. 55:07 This is a board of incredibly talented, knowledgeable, and passionate folks who offer a far more than I've been able to offer. So I look forward to continuing to learn with you. 55:19 Help out where I can next year, thanks. 55:26 OK, yeah, so this is not a voting item for today, but is something that will maybe be a voting item in 20 21, as we're working with the HMIS ad hoc committee that's reviewing HMIS vendors. So we thought we might have a vote to bring today, but there isn't, So just to be clear on that. So that's gonna give an update, and we'll see if there's any questions or discussions. 55:57 Thanks, Nicole. Hi, everybody, Should just come a bit to share a bit on that sort of context, and the division we have for HMIS, and then, I'm sure, why, why we began the conversation with the community about vendor transition. 56:15 ..., Chicago, about a year ago, are coming up, served in two weeks. It'll be a one-year mark. And his about day one, people have been asking to speak with me about how much they dislike HMIS? It's a clunky system. It's hard to get data out of it. 56:31 For most folks, and it ends up being a duty to enter data into HMIS, It's not what we would hope HMIS would be. That the data that HMIS contains should really be a helpful tool that helps drive our work. That allows us to understand when we're being successful and when things need to change. And that supports our efforts to rapidly helped people exit homelessness. 56:55 It should be structured to facilitate data sharing in line with client consent. 56:59 We should have a collective confidence in the quality and the reliability of the data that is entered and pulled back out. It should be easy to access data at the client, project, and system level. 57:11 And in recognition of the complexity and nuances that we all bring as individuals. Our data system should allow us to connect with other datasets to really holistically address people's needs. 57:21 This is the vision that we have for what HMIS should be for our community. 57:28 And so, with that in mind, we've been thinking a lot of out, why, where our vendor helps us in accomplishing that vision. And unfortunately, the answer is that it doesn't show after spending a fair amount of time really trying to dig into how to get our current vendor to be the solution. 57:48 To the community, The question as what if we changed? We think that the vendor transition is a critical step for achieving that vision. We can get would bring with it easier, reliable reporting software, data that we can report on in real time. The current vendor, it's a 24 hour lag. 58:07 The ability to do data integration with other system built in sort of just it totally in the weeds data quality item like the ability to auto exit clients to, have been inactive in line with what sort of community standards are about that inactivity validation of individual fields, to make sure that the search, if, if it's a date field You're actually putting a date in the greater, you know, ability to do more automation for co-ordinated entry, easier management of shelter beds, and better support from the vendor. 58:39 So what we've done so far, in August, we invited eighties, agency technical administrators. The point people at each of the provider agencies who supposed to be sort of the guru on HMIS within their organization to participate in the vendor review process. 58:55 From September to November, we did demos with vendors within the HMIS sort of world. And had them talk to us about how they would address some of these specific community pain points and questions that folks on the working group had. We got just three finalists. We then asked to provide a consistent questions and financial information and at this point and while there's I think some coalescing around, maybe the vendor, we would move to the HMIS doesn't yet feel comfortable recommending a migration. Because they think that there should be a bit more time for how the rollout. What happened. So, I wanted to just share that with folks at this, at this point. 59:38 Dad, our typical contract rolls over and at the end of April every year until we would imagine, therefore, that we'd be looking, hopefully, to migrate. It looks like an in May of 2022. 59:53 If it had, by that point where we're more comfortable with the rollout plan. So just to give folks sort of the update of where we're, we hope to get to with the community HMIS in the coming months and sort of where we are so far on the vendor conversation. 1:00:14 Beth, this is Carmelo, I did have a couple of questions related to this, Just understanding substantial shortcomings of the existing system and also the frustration that many have with, you know, the way that this system enables or doesn't enable improved programming and better decision making. I'm a little surprised that the decision to select a vendor has been delayed after so much work, and it's not obvious to me. 1:00:47 Um. 1:00:50 The decision couldn't be made without an appropriate timeline for planning for the change. 1:00:56 Those feel to me, like, sort of different decisions, like the selection of a binder around. 1:01:01 Um, and the timing of the transition, so I guess I would be curious to hear from you. 1:01:09 a little more detail about what, um, like, what the concerns are around the timing, and I guess, whether you, um, yeah, I guess, whether all Chicago kind of agrees with this recommendation. 1:01:25 Yeah, so I think, I share a few things. And as I mentioned, our current HMIS contract and renews are automatically every year on May first. Our current vendor has so far though we've asked a couple of times said they are unwilling to give any more time. 1:01:44 It's either another 12 months, or back to the end point. And show it, the transition will come with it, right? 1:01:51 April 30th. Sort of enrollment. 1:01:55 In conversations with the vendors, they know some of them when we talked about having a four bunched, sort of rollout plan with the community, said, Oh, that's longer than we would normally do it. But OK, We can spend four months on on the profit. 1:02:09 But I think for that committee, there were, there were questions and concern about whether or not the community would able be able to make the transition in that four month period, And that that was where a lot of the concern came from. 1:02:22 I'll also note that when we imagine coming with a recommendation, it was going to be coming to the Board, with sort of the question, and issue, which is we would, in the transition, have a short- term financial gap in paying for the migration. 1:02:36 And so would have hoped with the Board to help to figure out how to address, and the sort of, I think it was at max $170,000, that we would need to identify in an 18 month period. 1:02:49 So there were some questions about where, where the money would come from that. 1:02:53 I think the committee some reticence children are certainly outstanding items that that would come with it. You know, I think, I think, in terms of sort of the Chicago team and certainly speaking for myself, I think change is really hard. 1:03:11 I think a leap on a new vendor is a leap, and vendor transitions are hard. 1:03:17 And there are an enormous number of people for whom this would have impact. And it will likely mean that for the first half of 2021, as it relates to HMIS bed. And certainly the HMIS mapping all Chicago will be bearing a large amount of that the brunt of that work, that these agency technical administrators and the end users will have to learn a new system. 1:03:39 And that shouldn't be taken lightly. And we certainly don't take lightly that it would be a big amount of work for the system. But we wholeheartedly believe that without changing vendors there, there isn't a better future for us until that time happens. And I think it will. 1:04:00 For the duration of time that we stay with service point, I think we'll continue to be in pain points where it's hard to pull the data out, it's hard to put the data in and where we are sort of stuck in this place where it's really hard to generate report. 1:04:15 And so our are faced with limited data available for us. 1:04:19 And just sort of, all of that pain affect the community deals with will be with us while we're still with service points, but, and, and then, scale them. I paint of migration will be out there. And, so, I think, for us, it feels like it is going to be very painful. 1:04:36 But I think we're, we're excited about what could happen at the end of it, and so feel like it's time, Sure, I can introduce the pain of transition with the hopes of a better future, rather than living through the current pain for longer, and then still happening the transition. 1:04:56 So if, I mean, if I could just playback what you said, just to make sure that I'm understanding it correctly, and forgive me, if it's, you know, I'm paraphrasing, that maybe makes the sound a little, um, harsher than you meant. 1:05:09 But, um, what I heard there was that this is kind of kicking the can down the road and that like there's not much that's going to happen in the next year. That's actually going to make the pain of the transition easier. 1:05:25 I think that that, yes, with a note that I think sometimes for folks, if they have more time to fit with change, it feels less scary. And that we might get to the longer time period. 1:05:39 But I think the pain is coming, whether, whether it's this January or sure, January of 2021 or 2022, the data make that the system migration will be hard. 1:05:56 I don't know what the, I don't know how to advance our vision of HMIS and data use in the community without any vendor. and I, but I also, I just want to also acknowledge, in addition to the pain of the transition, the new system is not going to be perfect, right? 1:06:10 New data system is perfect, but it feels like that, that there are ones that are better, and that addressed a lot of our current pain points, that, that make it feel like, it's, it's worth, it's worth the new, the new system. 1:06:30 OK, my final question, and then I'll stop taking up so much of your time. 1:06:33 Is there anything that you think could be done to make this shorter transition feasible and specifically, that the board can do? 1:06:45 I think that there are ways. You know, one of the things that folks were concerned about. 1:06:49 I think our assurance, aye, hope to present there. 1:06:53 They're concerned that accurately, but I think there's the fear and perhaps that in trying to fill the gap around sort of the cost that it would end up being in individual agency's responsibility to pay for it. 1:07:07 And I think, you know, the board, the board could help in addressing that by, you know, sort of committing that. The answer would be that we would find funding either through government resources or philanthropic. Or, you know, we would stage some sort of fundraiser event. I don't know, I think sure, thinking creatively, so that it's not about asking individual agencies to contribute more, and I think would would allay some of their concerns. 1:07:30 I was reminded by a member of the working group that the agency participation agreement that all agencies sign to. Use HMIS says that we could at anytime charge them money. Which I had not realized, or not remembered was in there. And so I think all Chicago would hope that the answer isn't to charge the agency for this. It is really a system. I think the board's commitment that. 1:07:54 And you're going to work with us to make sure that the cost doesn't come back on the agencies. And that we find the transition costs, would, I think, help. 1:08:02 And there's also the potential, you know, there's sort of an enormous amount of training support there. 1:08:09 one of the vendors that we're particularly interested in, I think, that the Committee would stand behind. They could provide training to end users or all Chicago, because they could provide training on Chicago's would provide training to end users. 1:08:20 We could also sort of just ramp up what training looks like, to ensure that end users feel like they have every support they could need. It would come with financial implication to to pay the vendor to sort of round out the training support, but I think that would also help allay some of the concerns. 1:08:38 I know that there's, there's someone to turn to at all times, we can ensure that they're sort of training support into during the month, after the migration well. And I think both of those would probably have financial implication of money. 1:08:52 We'd have to find, and I don't at this moment, know what the, the training support dollar amount would be, but I think, sort of addressing both of those would, I think, allow the committee to feel more comfortable in it. 1:09:07 But I am, I am not positive, that, that, that would would fix all of their concerns. 1:09:17 This is a few questions, too. So one best, you talked about a four month time period being the time period that they've done rollout. Or one of the vendors had done rollout. Is this comparable to a community of our size, that type of a rollout to can you talk about Chicago's capacity? And if you feel like you have current capacity to meet the need around it. 1:09:46 three, if you could talk a little bit about, if you find that with the committee. No. 1:09:55 Was it the bulk of the committee said, that really felt like this was not appropriate, or is it a few outliers? And for, we've talked earlier about having something happening in January, you know, is there a special board meeting in January, if the, if this was to be approved at that point, do you feel like that would be, would meet the timeline for implementation? 1:10:20 I'm going to try to get, I might need a reminder of some of the questions, and I'll see what I can do. In terms of migration, the response we've gotten from the vendor, I would hope to go to and I was sort of clear about this with the committee. And they can be clear with you all. It's a company called Bit Focus. Their software is called Clarity. And they were surprised and said, normally they do migrations in less than four months. That they were happy to do it with us over the course of four months, but that they typically do it in a faster timeframe. And they happened to be the vendor with that. 1:10:53 As we see sort of communities in the country leaving service point, they tend to be going to, to clarity, and LA is, is on Clarity at this point, and so made it through, and the communities to be spoken to about it. You know, acknowledge it. It's hard work, but, but we get there. I think. 1:11:15 I know that you had also the question about whether all Chicago had the capacity, and I would say yes. 1:11:22 I think, I think that it is enough. 1:11:25 But I do think we have the capacity. 1:11:27 We also are, you're mindful of and have had already been thinking about, you know, the different kinds of other support we might need from sort of a consulting community to ensure that we were able to provide this the time and attention it needs. 1:11:43 And it would be really a sort of all hands on deck effort to, to ensure that that happens. And data was cleaned up and reviewed, and that we migrated accurate effectively. And sort of, we're making sure that this, this is the top priority, because we feel like it's so important for the migration. 1:12:01 And in terms of the process in January, I think it was, you know, I'm, I'm mindful of. 1:12:10 For every day that we sort of have to wait to have an approval and then begin the contracting process with the vendor and then the process of rollout. I think we're sort of in that sort of balancing act of if we could do it in early January and have an approval, maybe. But I think, you know, the opportunity, and I'm not sure what would. 1:12:33 Change for the committee, because, sort of April 30th is still coming. 1:12:37 And so, I don't know what other conversations we've had to then come back to the board for an approval in January. That that is different than, is information we have right now? 1:12:49 All right. I'm not I'm not sure what I sort of subsequent date vote would, would get us. 1:12:56 So, I think, you know, all Chicago is committed to this. 1:12:59 And I think, I think the vendor, what would work intentionally with her two, to make the migration as we needed them to. 1:13:10 So, I'm not, I'm not following. So is it that, that it is possible for something to be move forward, or at this point, it is not? 1:13:20 With the board? 1:13:22 And what this group do, you know, what you're asking of the board related to to passage versus what the committee is, is responsible for. 1:13:34 I think, in terms of that, I think, Typically, I think, and my understanding from you is that this group would make a recommendation to the board about a vendor selection and a plan. And sort of that we should migrate. They don't, at this point, have that as a recommendation. 1:13:52 I think the board could decide to do other things as the board for this EOC. I think the things that would make it more. 1:14:05 Sure. 1:14:06 Palatable for the community, or would allay the concerns that have precluded them for making recommendation, would come really around sort of statements around how we would pay for this. 1:14:18 And the ability, you know, sort of the affirmation that we would cover the that the Board is committed to and withheld. Chicago ensuring that the costs are covered and not. 1:14:31 Put on individual agencies. And that the board is, again, with all Chicago affirming that we could pay for extra training support. 1:14:41 I think would help with, with those concerns, and that sometimes, we make system choices that aren't necessarily in-line with exactly what an individual provider, or a lot of times, we make system choices for the benefit of the system. And I think that's within the board's purview to make that decision, recognizing that. 1:15:01 I don't, I don't think that the HMIS working group would come back with a different recommendation in early 2021, then, than they are right now. Like, I don't think they're going to come back to you all in the short-term. 1:15:14 And, I think to carmelo questions, I think there are ways that the board, if they wanted to make a different decision, could address some of the concerns in their decision making. 1:15:27 Christine says, Carolyn Brooks, I appreciate your your questions up until yesterday, It seemed that the process was moving very well. 1:15:37 I think for everyone's clarity to understand our current existing contract, Yeah, it has the potential of ending on April 30th. 1:15:47 What that means is we've reached out to that vendor to see if they would be willing to extend us some time, so that we could have more time to make this decision and give you a recommendation. 1:16:00 They are not willing to do that. 1:16:02 So, I think our options are, we could continue to stick with that vendor, but I will be very honest with you. 1:16:10 When I bought Bethan a year ago, and I said, clean that dashboard up. 1:16:15 And I want to make sure that the data we put out is accurate, clean, and reflective of the work that we're doing. 1:16:22 I will tell you, from my own perspective, much of the failures that we have experience with trying to deliver on requests through this current vendor, are because of the vendor and their own willingness to, to change. 1:16:36 So, we have a little bit of, We don't have an unanimous recommendation from the Committee because we have a couple of, um, agencies who are, who have concerns the same question to do. And I think that put it well, when she said, Sometimes, you know, change is hard, and sometimes, it helps when people can sit in it for a minute to think about it, and to see that should benefit. So, we could do nothing. And I promise you, we will continue not, to deliver at the level, I believe we should be able to deliver. 1:17:10 With our data and our, our commitment to our community to put, to manage and provide that data. 1:17:17 Um, we're pretty confident that if we're able to move forward and change vendors. 1:17:23 There's been a ton of research and we've reached out to a lot of other C Cs and communities in other states to ask them how this is. 1:17:32 All that being said, end users are very important. 1:17:35 You all don't have to input the data. 1:17:37 The people at these agencies at your agencies have to do so, and so, we do need there. 1:17:44 We do need their level of comfort and in their buy in to make sure that we can get this done. 1:17:50 So, it's kicking the, it is carmela. It's kicking the problem down the road. 1:17:55 Or, uh, Beth is being nice, Susan, I think I need her to be. 1:17:59 We need this board to help us make some decisions sooner rather than later. 1:18:07 That's, this is Steve Brown. I'm going to make a comment and then some questions. You know, we had the pilot a couple of years ago, and I had an opportunity to look under the hood for this particular vendor. 1:18:18 And, quite frankly, I thought it was, it was quite a primitive system. 1:18:24 That does not reflect kind of standards that we see with software vendors. And I understand your concern of wanting to transition out of this. 1:18:36 I also have had experience managing transition projects with both as a vendor in my days back at Motorola. And having UI health recently going from a transition from Cerner to Epic and so aware of the process for months, No, although it's not near as much as complex as an electronic medical record. 1:19:02 four months sounds within the realm of possibility. But also maybe an aggressive schedule. I just wanted to see, do you think you, it sounds like we would be kicking it down can. Kicking the, can another year down the road When with all the types of things that we need to accomplish, especially with healthcare clamoring for HMIS data that that would delay a lot of the more progressive things we would like to do. 1:19:31 Do you believe that you have the resources to manage the transition if you were to get board approval and do you think you could do it? 1:19:42 And given that, yeah, I know this is, you know, it might be an aggressive schedule, but do you think you reasonably could accomplish this by April 30th? 1:19:54 You thanks for that, and I think it's a very apt description of the system. And it's rudimentary, and we do, we do think that this is a viable thing to accomplish in four months, and I will say you know Chicago. 1:20:11 Going to a new system, we are a big COCs and show it, and I think a value add, that accompanies that we might migrate to as they think about their market share. And so I think they're pretty motivated to help us make this process go well. In addition, so I think not only do I think we have the resources, and are we well motivated, but I think that company is also and wanting to make this move smoothly for us. 1:20:42 Because Chicago isn't, I think, a big deal for them. 1:20:48 So, what would be a timeline moving forward for this? 1:20:52 Yeah. 1:20:53 I think we would likely call the, I mean, I think they're started to two pieces. one is, I think they're, sort of the question of what it is, you know. The, the ask why isn't what the time period is. But I think the moment we had approval, we would call the vendor and begin the contracting process and then work with them to plan the rollout plan and start communicating with all the EPA and the community at large about it. 1:21:16 What the scheduling is and what that means about when, and how we would be doing data cleanup activities, as well as, when training would begin. And, and working with all of the different sort of sub systems that exist within our, just our building out how their data get structured within the new system. And so we would answer, make up that work plan, and then get going. 1:21:38 And I will say that sort of in this right training for end users, usually happens sort of towards the end, because you gotta build the system. Or modify this a gym before you can then start training anyone on it. So I am more than anything, I would imagine that you're perfectly January, and February would be a lot of work for all Chicago, to work on data cleanup activities. 1:21:59 And, to begin the work in partnership with sort of like the co-ordinated Entry System like that, through the, a call center. 1:22:10 Like that, you know, shelter system, or shared any of the others, to figure out What it needs to look like in the new system. So, that we're, we're building it, in the way that, both is a, sort of least disruptive, but also allows us to make improvements on the way. information is managed already. And the flexible housing pool would be another piece of it, right, where we have sure those intentional conversations to ensure we were, we were structuring things the way, the ways folks want get us to, that, which are just, build out a calendar plan with the vendor, and building from their guidance in order to, to get moving. 1:22:48 Sure. Immediately. 1:22:55 Great, thank you. So, how can our board help in this then? 1:23:02 Or do we want to make a recommendation to roll forward? Is that what we're putting forth here today? 1:23:10 Didn't think the board was being asked for any. 1:23:15 Correct me if I'm wrong. 1:23:17 Horrible. 1:23:24 Oh, sorry Debbie, it sounds to me like we're being told that we in fact can decide to vote to move this forward even though that wasn't the request that came to the board. Is that what I'm understanding? 1:23:39 Yes, this is Carolyn Debi. 1:23:42 I think, um, just from the momentum that's been going with the Committee, The only reason we took it off the agenda for your vote is because we had at least one person who was against it, and that person represents the agency as an an 88. Remind me again, Beth, but that stands for that Agency Technical Administrator. 1:24:07 Could you share how many people are on that committee? And is it appropriate to share. How many votes or yes. And how many votes for now? 1:24:17 Or am I asking an inappropriate question? 1:24:22 I think that can share that with you. 1:24:26 There's about 12 people who are on it. 1:24:28 And we, because it's sort of the nature of how a conversation went. And not everyone waited and ultimately, on a decision. 1:24:36 And, and, and sort of it, it was a bit all over, and folks who felt like we should migrate, We shouldn't migrate, we should migrate, but not yet, because we were worried about how long it is. 1:24:47 So I will add a couple of things to the conversation before we, before we decide how to move forward. 1:24:55 Um, one is, I just appreciate this conversation. 1:25:00 I think this is the kinds of conversations and decisions our board should be having and make crew, I appreciate that. 1:25:08 Thoroughness, that officer cargo, I just found incredibly well prepared and knowledgeable. 1:25:16 Like you have the needs of the community in mind and putting that first. And then I'm not surprised at that, but I just want to acknowledge that because I really appreciate it. 1:25:27 I understand that there's a $160,000 gap over 18 months, and I would be, you know, it doesn't, it doesn't sound like an unreasonable amount of money to be able to raise from private philanthropy, although private philanthropy is doing, you know, a lot to support the expedited Housing Initiative and the Flexible Housing. 1:25:52 So I I know, I, I can't make any promises, But I would certainly be glad to help with that with that advocacy. 1:26:03 Um, And then, the last thing I want to say is that I would like some. 1:26:13 It would help me to understand whether you think that the impact of covert 19 and dealing with that, and the undue stress, that it has put an agency, that we would be asking them to do something that, um, I'm just wondering if that came up as part of the reason that they wanted to wait, or if it was all these other reasons that were discussed. 1:26:38 Yeah, certainly it was raised by by at least one member of the committee that they, they detail concerned that too. 1:26:45 Because of the Church, folks being remote and stuff like that. That it would make it harder. And we have other folks who have said that. actually they think because of sort of how poverty disruptive work, this would make it easier and also address some of their pain points that have been sort of main sharper as pain points because of coated. And I think, I think what's hard about sort of the nature of the of the committee addressed. 1:27:09 I think what happens often, in terms of who comes to committees, is not necessarily fully representative of the community, and the different perspectives that are out there. And it can give you folks who, you know, have figured out a way to make time to show up at these meetings. 1:27:28 Who are either the folks who have a lot of concern, one way, or the other, I think. 1:27:35 And so it's a bit hard to know where the whole community is, feeling about the notion of change. 1:27:43 Except to say that the volume of complaints about HMIS, as many of you are familiar with as your questions have gotten the answer, we can't do that or are having trouble figuring out how to do that. And that the pain is universally felt or nearly universally held and I will say that in light of coded you know, we've gotten and served for service point. We've got an every single piece of training that people have to go through is all available online. And it seems to have gone over very well and easily for the community. So I think again, from an all Chicago perspective we think we think we're ready and equipped to support the community through this. And I I also think you know there's sort of a conversation around whether we would ask the vendor to provide more end user training to just ensure that there's sort of no rock unturned as far as helping folks get used to the new system recognizing that. 1:28:40 New systems are just great. You just have to learn right, every time, like your phone operating system updates, right? You gotta like re-oriented. And data entry is just one more thing that a lot of the end users have to have on their to-do list that, you know, makes a time consuming and hard. But we do think that there are aspects of the new system that would actually simplify things for folks like parallel. 1:29:03 For our emergency services providers, there's a lot of really great sort of easy ways to check booked into project. 1:29:11 There's an auto exit setting that allows you so that the pain that a lot of sort of drop in centers have. I have to go in, not only to enter you, but then I have to exit, even when I haven't seen you, after certain number of days, we can just set that parameter for them, and suddenly, they won't have to exit. 1:29:29 They just would be exited, and that will be sort of an enormous time saved for folks. 1:29:34 And so I think that our hope is that the pain will be in the short term and that the payoffs will will stay with us for a long time. 1:29:46 Manifest Oh, God. 1:29:48 No, no, go ahead. 1:29:51 Also, raising my hand whenever it's appropriate. 1:29:57 I have spoken, so I can wait. 1:30:00 Fred, you should, you should go first. 1:30:02 OK, thank you. 1:30:05 Thank you for this, and this discussion and this discussion, interesting. 1:30:14 I, my specific question is, is, I guess I always in words. 1:30:21 She talked about this sentence. 1:30:25 The recommendation is made to us is the, quote, the broader community, you need to plan the rollout with the broader community, know what the word broader community means. I suspect what it means is users in which case, you should say it means the broader community, Like health care providers, or, or? 1:30:53 Yes, the real people interests are the people who are providing the information, the homeless people. 1:31:00 Then you should use that. So, what does the term broader community means? 1:31:05 And do you stick by this recommendation that you, I'm not recommending a new vendor at this time? 1:31:14 Thanks, Fred, and sorry about that. When, when I had the broader community and roll out, it's the end users of the system who will have to interface with it, to put in information. And I don't anticipate there will be much implication for people experiencing homelessness about, about what data is entered in general. And, so, it's really about the person who asked the interface. With the data system, though, I will say the system does come with it. Other ways to interact with people experiencing homelessness and share information with them and follow up with them. 1:31:48 Would expect we would engage with other sectors as sort of a Phase two of this. First and foremost, we needed the system to work for our small circle of people directly addressing people's needs as they experienced homelessness. And then we would move out to other systems. and in terms of it. 1:32:08 I think I, where I am, where I was, when I came in, wanting to give you all information and empower the boards to both ask questions and make the decisions that they think are important for the community that the committee that has been convened feel that they need more time for rollout. 1:32:25 And so does not recommend a change at this time, which would mean we would change in not until May of 2022, And I bring it to the board as inflammation and defer to all of you on whether or not there was a different recommendation or suggestion to make about how we proceed as a community. 1:32:46 I appreciate it. 1:32:49 Sorry. 1:32:50 How come our year, we're gonna, go ahead, I just have one final question, and then, um, no Might entertain making a motion. 1:32:58 That's if, if the Board were to make a recommendation or decision at this potential special meeting in January, would that be? Would that put a successful transition at the end of April, at risk? 1:33:13 From your perspective, if the transit, or put differently, if the transition is to occur at the end of April, does a decision need to be made today. So, successful. 1:33:26 I think every day we wait is a day longer, where we, we sort of lose time. So, I think if, if there was going to be, you know, folks wanted time to fit on this, and we came back together in early January, I think, I think it might. There'll be feasible, But I think it's much longer than early January. And I'd be worried about, about time we sacrifice for this process. 1:33:50 And they don't know in terms of the sort of either the committee or what all Chicago would be able to share with you. And I'm not sure what other new information would be able to provide at the subsequent meetings. 1:34:02 But open to the questions and what information you'd like. 1:34:16 This is Christy Healy, Cook County. I think that, you know, we've been talking as within the board and outside of the board of the transition from this vendor for years. I appreciate all the work that you've done. Bath and your comments, Carolyn about. And that's your priority. 1:34:34 I think we've talked about this with previous leadership. And this has been a topic of conversation for quite awhile, and it's just kind of shocking to hear May of 2022 as being a start point if some action is not made. 1:34:50 On this, on this now, I think if we are, as we understand HMIS, to be a primary tool to help us think about how we are, ensuring that people who are extremely vulnerable within this very vulnerable population And HMIS is the tool that helps us identify who people are and helps us move through and ensuring that there's greater co-ordination Earlier today. We heard from the, you know about lack of co-ordination and what that looks like and how that impacts members of our community experiencing homelessness. 1:35:32 So, I, my feeling is that may of 2022 feels like way too long and short, wait for some type of intervention and change. 1:35:46 When we pondering this for to, you know, for years, I might if what my questions were really targeted at, we're trying to understand, do you have the capacity to roll out, and it is in such a way that, although it will be challenging, is doable. 1:36:04 If there is, you know, are there opportunities for leadership at the end user organizations to play a greater role in an inch and working with their teams around this, we have the huge transition that we have talked about around the, around changing the agency. You know, and trying to understand the role of the lead agency, There was a lot of work that was done. I all Chicago, and talking to executive directors, and engaging them to engage their teens and their staff in the process. 1:36:39 So, I'm, So, I think that that's one piece to think about as you continue to engage in this process. I'm just very concerned about continued delays. I'm also noticing we haven't really heard in this discussion much from the service providers connection around. 1:36:58 Around that, we're actually moving towards a vote now. 1:37:11 Ah! 1:37:17 OK, so we're, oh, for everyone, Ben had to leave a bit earlier, So I am going to step in in his stead. 1:37:33 So where are we at? 1:37:34 Right now, Do we need a motion, or is there any other conversation around this? 1:37:46 Oh, this is Carmelo, and I'm feeling a little out of my element here, because I had never really thought of this as a specific decision that the Board was empowered to make. 1:37:57 But I, and I will say, I would certainly have felt more comfortable bringing this forward as a recommendation of the SS. 1:38:07 But, you know, I know that the tiny has not aligned to make that possible. And if it does, I wholeheartedly agree with what Christine just articulated around that timeline. 1:38:19 I think there is compelling reason to to make a transition sooner. 1:38:22 So, forgive me if some of the language that I'm using here is incorrect. 1:38:30 Certainly open to feedback, but I will make a motion that the Board direct all Chicago to select a new vendor for HMIS effective May first, 2020. 1:38:45 Um, as, and two. And for that vendor to be the recommended vendor of the Ad Hoc group. 1:38:55 Um, and that the board commits to raising the $170,000 necessary to ensure that service providers are appropriately trained in the system. 1:39:11 Means that I would feel a little Apple TV, so if anyone has thoughts on how that should be worded, please. 1:39:22 OK, so, so, we have a motion. We have a second. 1:39:32 Second. 1:39:35 And who was that? 1:39:38 Christie Hailey. County. 1:39:41 OK. 1:39:43 Oh, now we have the discussion. 1:39:55 Can everyone see the motion on their right? 1:40:00 Yes. Yes. 1:40:05 Steve Brown, question. Is the vendor recommended by the Ad Hoc Group the same and that? 1:40:14 All Chicago is looking towards yes. 1:40:21 Yes, Steve, I believe it is OK, thank you. 1:40:30 I would do, anyway. 1:40:32 I would just amend the motion to say the name of the vendor. 1:40:36 So, it is recommended. 1:40:41 The name of the vendor is, I'm sure the companies bit focus and the vendor software is clarity. 1:40:50 Claire? 1:40:51 If no one objects to that, you can just add it in there without going through a formal motion and second. 1:41:00 Is there any objection to the amendment making that amendment to this amendment? I'm sorry. 1:41:07 He gets a simple. Yes. 1:41:10 Yeah. 1:41:11 So hearing none. 1:41:13 Correct. 1:41:15 I think it's fine. 1:41:18 OK, any other anyone wish to speak in favor? 1:41:26 Any opposition? 1:41:32 OK, I think we should vote on this. 1:41:36 Sure. 1:41:41 All in favor of. 1:41:47 this motion, um, please signify by saying aye. 1:41:55 All right. 1:41:57 Aye. Aye. 1:41:59 Hi. 1:42:08 If there's anyone that opposes this motion, please say nay. 1:42:20 OK, Amy Abstention. 1:42:25 OK, hearing none, the motion carries. 1:42:30 OK, now, we want to move into the public comment period. 1:42:36 Know, Richard, there was one item spread requested from our consent agenda that I put at the end here. So we could talk through that now, so that's OK. 1:42:47 Yes, I'm sorry, this is their time. Yeah. 1:42:53 Nobody has indicated that they wish to speak, and, oh, actually, Chris. Chris Ohara indicated he wants to speak during the public comment section. 1:43:05 So let's just do a time check that, suppose this was supposed to start at 11. 1:43:11 So we could move to that and then, if there's time, come back to the Chicago report. 1:43:19 OK, Thank you for vice versa. I can try to do, which, which are you saying the code, just so, I'm clear. Are we going to the comment, or are we going for it? 1:43:29 I think it's up to the group. Right. I'm not sure. If you want, if you think the article, the report's going to take a long time or if you have specific questions? 1:43:39 Yeah. I'd rather hear from the public comment. And then, and then just do it there as a briefs. 1:43:49 A British report, If there's time, and I guess, if there's only one person, He's only going to talk for a few minutes. And there should be a few minutes left for you to do your work. 1:44:03 Great. 1:44:03 So, Chris, I'm gonna unmute you and then you might have to unmute yourself by pushing star six on your phone. 1:44:20 Or if you're in the goto Webinar? Yep, we can hear you. 1:44:24 Hey, hello, I understand that the Board was hamstrung on having to make this decision, but I thought carmelo was actually more on target that there could have been a specialist, or meeting on January, on the on the HMIS topic. 1:44:40 The meeting happened yesterday. 1:44:44 We hadn't come to a consensus on a vendor. 1:44:46 I know someone can say that they believed, one vendor was in the lead, but that was all Chicago's choice. 1:44:54 Are some may in the room, may have favored that vendor, but there was never an official tally on that. 1:45:00 This is why I've been advocating for a long time that public comment auda happened a lot earlier in these meetings. 1:45:07 And they do, in a lot of other meetings, I'm involved in, and I understand where Christine and others felt they needed the need to have this happen, But it's very telling that the service providers weren't involved in this, because this meeting happened yesterday. And I don't know how soon they can communicate too. 1:45:28 their, their leadership on something like this, because there's a short turnaround. 1:45:34 And there was also a nested PEC meeting yesterday, where they were really trying to lay out on what was going on with the implementation structure, and they were really trying to make sure they had got all their ducks in a row on that. 1:45:47 And after the group had not met, actually, after the group met, and decided not to move forward on this, we were send an e-mail at 3 30 in the afternoon. 1:45:58 Did this make a decision? 1:46:00 Because one member wanted to, not because it was motioned, or anything like that. 1:46:07 And I thought that the communication should have been a very clear one, and it ended up being a Google Form. 1:46:17 I've never seen happen before when it comes to making decisions that are that important. 1:46:25 And I would like to say that this process was very rushed. 1:46:29 I know all Chicago has to do the work, but there were financial questions that we had, that there weren't weren't answers to. 1:46:37 Like with the match be there for the HMIS grant and for the Collaborative Applicant Grant, and for potentially, I'm not sure how the homeless prevention grant works, but that's another grant that they have to have a match for, I think. 1:46:51 And so, again, I think this could have been done in January, and there's been special meetings for other decisions at the board, and the contract doesn't end until April. So I don't know why this decision had to happen today. 1:47:06 And I'd like to implore that if we are going to be moving forward into an implementation structure that the committees feel that their voices are not heard. 1:47:15 How do you get the buy in to have the people involved in those committees? 1:47:20 And I'd like to thank you for your time. 1:47:25 Thank you, Chris. 1:47:29 Are there any other comments? 1:47:34 This is Baskin. I, can I respond. 1:47:41 Yeah, Chris, I appreciate that comment that you've raised. And I think, and certainly one of the pieces that we, we brought forward and that the Board has just affirmed in their motion is that they would ensure that the financial pieces are covered mentor. I think in terms of that piece, and I feel supported by our fire board to, to address the financial questions of this. 1:48:03 And I think to the question of sort of service providers in HMIS, I think it's sort of an interesting question globally for us on, on how our community does work. And how we ensure that. We're able to respond to questions that come up by the folks that we've empowered in our community to be the decision makers so that we're able to move forward. 1:48:25 I think, you know, agencies have ETA's, which is how they come through to participate. And we would look to them to be sharing the information throughout their agency about what's happening. 1:48:39 I understand that's not necessarily always like what does occur, and that, no, as I think the whole group heard. 1:48:49 We came forward with information today and and honored that the Committee was unsure and heard from the Board that they wanted us to move forward. and not wait until 20 22 to make the migration and show. And we'll work with the committee to figure out how, how this moves moves forward and try to maximize their for the time we have for the rollout and work with the community to ensure that they're able to onboard to the system appropriately. 1:49:22 Um, this is Debbie Resnick. 1:49:27 I think the issue, I think there's a few things I want to say. one is, Chris, thank you for your comments, and I do, I do, I don't understand the roles and whether we need to make a change going forward about when and who can speak to emotion. But I understand your frustration and not being able to speak earlier. 1:49:49 I also want to say that I want to be, I think this is incredibly important. And I want to be really, really clear on that. 1:49:58 I just heard that Beth did not advocate with the Board for this about carmelo brought up a question, A good question that led the board into a conversation during which the board made a decision. 1:50:15 Beth was very clear the entire time that the Committee did not want this, All Chicago must work with providers to implement this. 1:50:26 And if, you know, I don't know if anybody took verbatim notes on that meeting, but I think that's a really important point, because, I understand that, people are going to be up, that. And, if they are up, database should be upset with the board. 1:50:42 And, and so, to the service providers that are in the room, I guess I just, I just want to say it is the board, the board made this decision. 1:50:52 And the Board made this decision based on our, based on our own question. 1:50:57 Um, that's if you can send, to me, the language that you use at the beginning of that conversation, to explain the reason for making vendors, which I would be happy to try to help with, with, advocating for our funding to cover that. 1:51:23 Yeah, and this is Carmelo, I'll just chime in to say one that I echo, what Debbie said. 1:51:28 Like, Chris, I really appreciate you making that comment. 1:51:31 I, I know there's a level on which I did not, certainly did not feel comfortable proceeding in the way that we did. 1:51:40 I think ideally, this process would have looked different, and we would have taken a bit more time, but aye. 1:51:47 I stand by the motion that I made, in part because I took that better word than waiting until late January would. 1:51:54 Um, no, would potentially put the transition at risk. 1:51:59 That, having been said. 1:52:00 You know, I take Bath at her word, and, you know, what she relaid about, know, the level of support for this specific gender, etcetera. 1:52:11 If we learn anything in January, or in the coming weeks, No indicating that there was any, sort of, or meaningful disagreement about the preferred vendor should be, or, lack of confidence that that's funding for training, is going to be enough to ensure a smooth transition. You know, I will commit as a board member to requesting a special meetings for January. But, you know, my hope is that that won't be necessary given that these resources for training will be made available on that. We're going to have at least four months for the transition. 1:52:44 Kerala, I appreciate that. If Debbie, again. I don't think staff said that it would waiting until January would put at risk. I think her answer to that question was very carefully. 1:52:56 What I heard with very carefully worded, which was we, we, we could probably wait until January, but that every day that we wait is a day lost and working toward this transition. 1:53:12 So, that was what I just want to be clear about what I heard. 1:53:15 No, that's, that's fair, I think. 1:53:18 I think what I, what I heard was early January would probably be fine, and I made the assumption that there was no way we'd be able to meet in early January. So, that's an assumption that I made. 1:53:28 And that's an important clarification, and you had 100% unanimous vote from the Board behind that motion. 1:53:37 And I agree, I, you know, I just, I've been on this, see if this works for, you know, a long time. 1:53:45 and, and it is really hard to make these decisions. And it's really hard to make a decision. 1:53:55 Um, when when a service provider disagrees. Because the majority of us aren't doing that work. 1:54:05 And so, I, just, personally, I will say that I did not make that decision lightly. I don't believe that any of us did. 1:54:13 It is a hard thing to do, and a, it is it is not. You know. 1:54:19 And I think it was done with the intention that we are, we need to move forward with change. 1:54:27 And it's going to be hard for all of us. 1:54:31 But, sure. 1:54:34 May 20, 22 is too far away, So, I appreciate this conversation. I just wanted a time check Is 10, 12, 11, 26. 1:54:48 We still have a couple of items. 1:54:51 Um, and, I would like to just move us along possible. 1:54:58 Someone was saying something. 1:55:02 Yeah, this is Christy ... crowd, I'm sorry, I, because I'm afraid this is going to send down a rabbit hole of it further, but I did. 1:55:08 just want to, Christy, before you do that, then let me just ask why with everyone on the board. 1:55:15 I mean, everyone that's in attendance, can we extend this for another, say, 5, 10 minutes, if that's all right? 1:55:27 Yes. 1:55:28 Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. 1:55:32 Yes. Absolutely. 1:55:33 Go for it. Chris, And thank you all. 1:55:35 Yeah. So, I don't, I don't want this to, again, take us down a rabbit hole, but I think I do need a kind of a point of order question to be put out there. 1:55:43 Which is, to me, it feels like the question is the vender to be used for HMIS. 1:55:53 Does not feel like a governance decision that the Board should necessarily be making. It feels to me like a vendor selection. 1:56:04 Should be a decision, that is within the confines of the work product of all Chicago. 1:56:10 In their role, in consultation with other stakeholders. So I appreciate so much that Beth brought this before us. But I would ask the question. 1:56:17 I don't know that it can be answered today, but is this a place where we, as a board should really have authority over this decision, or should we take under the guidance of all Chicago, that they are doing, their diligence to, to seek vendors that are more appropriate to this, that we are? Again, we're here in the role of a governance body, and I don't, I'm fearful about overstepping and making decisions about actual work, product, or work functions. 1:56:49 That really should be left, two, all Chicago. So I just wanted to register that concern, because it has felt to me like we may be bleeding beyond what our authority should be. 1:57:00 Christie, I appreciate that point and I would have been glad to take a friendly amendment and remove it because I think your point is well taken. And I hadn't thought about that aspect through. I don't know that it's too late to amend the motion now. 1:57:19 I'm not sure. 1:57:24 I'll just chime in and say, I mean, that is the reason that I initially proposed that mayor wording of, you know, pursuant to the recommended pursuance, preferred vendor of the Ad Hoc Committee or something to that effect. 1:57:36 I should have clarified that, that was my plan, and I would have, I would have been glad to accept that change to my amendment mousa. 1:57:50 It appears that the question, and, Christy, that was a good, a good observation. So, it appears that, where we're at right now, what can we do right now? 1:58:02 So, as not to be so, the script is, in terms of, to all Chicago and their selection? Is there something that we can do right now to say, Hey, Hey, choose whomever you want. 1:58:22 Richard, this is Caroline. 1:58:23 If I can help with this, I so appreciate the consideration you are giving us all, but we will work and in concert with the committee, they've done a lot of work. They've reviewed a lot of information. 1:58:36 And we will go with the, it's not just all Chicago looking at it. 1:58:41 And Beth, correct me if I'm wrong, but what we needed from you today is what we got. 1:58:47 We need this board to step up front. 1:58:51 Because, to be real honest with you, we have to change the perception, but all Chicago is doing this to all Chicago satisfaction. 1:59:00 We are here together to do this work jointly and we're not going to make any assumptions and put anything before you, without utilizing the significant amount of work and engagement we force to have are our partners and our stakeholders help us make that decision. 1:59:21 So I thank you for the consideration but unless anybody else disagrees well, I'm not, I think we're fine. 1:59:30 Thank you Carolyn. 1:59:31 I think the problem is that I made the mistake of putting the vendor name into the motion, um, And so it is now, it was now in the motion. That was passed. 1:59:43 And I think the question per our Robert's Rules and what can we do to remove that? 1:59:50 Yeah, wait, to bring it up again you need to rethink, not reconsidered the vote. It's not the vote. You want to something previously adopted. 2:00:04 So, what you would do is go back to that motion, you adopted, and amended by putting in or taking out whatever you want. 2:00:12 That's to him that I would like to amend the motion by rescinding my recommendation of putting the vendor in and leaving the language as Carmelo initially submitted it. 2:00:29 And I believe that requires a two thirds vote. Which means, if everybody agrees, no problem. 2:00:36 I think we also, we need to also remove the amount of money then, because that amount of money is attached to a particular vendor. We just say they raise the funds necessary. 2:00:48 You can include that in that motion to amend something previously adopted, so you're protecting what you want to say now, then somebody needs to move to amend it by removing those two items you just mentioned. 2:01:02 I'm of two and then applying your motion. 2:01:08 I move to amend the motion to remove the vendor name and to remove the specific dollar amount should be raised. 2:01:19 Is there a second? 2:01:21 Yeah. 2:01:26 OK, so, any further discussion? 2:01:35 OK, all in favor of the mended motion, please signify by saying Aye. 2:01:45 Aye, Aye. 2:01:48 Excuse me, Whenever there is a tensor, and I guess not appropriate so you would have to get, have the house. 2:01:57 Then, unless you want to show the body object, nobody objected to thirds instead of doing a roll call, OK, OK, thank you. Let's let's do it that way. Sorry, everyone. 2:02:14 Is there any objections to, to this motion? 2:02:21 Hearing none, It's fast. 2:02:24 Right, I was trying to give people time, in case they were muted, OK. 2:02:31 OK, hearing none, then the motion carries. 2:02:35 Right, OK, there we have it: All right. 2:02:42 Thank you. 2:02:44 So now we want to get to Is it Was it? Was it all Chicago or was it Fred? 2:02:57 I'm happy to do a very brief Also Cargo Report per friends' requests. 2:03:04 Yeah. And then we item after you, and that's Carolyn. 2:03:09 That's right. So in your board packet, on pages 10 and 11, there are three updates. None of them are voting items. But we gave a brief HUD 2024 update, which basically just says: We don't know if there's going to be an offer occurred. I think it's currently in legislation that may pass in the next couple of weeks, that would skip a no fine, just auto fund everybody. 2:03:31 So as soon as we know that we'll share with the board, we're still ready with a contingency plan. If we're required to do some kind of no flow process. 2:03:39 We're about to undertake the 2021 housing inventory count, and point in time count. And there's a lot of details in there, about the methodology, and what's changing for, for this year. 2:03:53 So you can read more about that in your packet. 2:03:59 Nicole, is there any update on Divi bonus money? Is that a definite? No? Is it in the same pod as the other had money in terms of a lack of clarity about the process? Or is there any other update? 2:04:12 Since there isn't a no fly this year, there would not be. If there isn't a no, for, there would not be any bonus funding, I'm guessing. 2:04:24 So we just have to wait to see what releases, what our options are. 2:04:27 Good. 2:04:31 OK, any other question? 2:04:37 Hearing none, Carolyn Yura, I promise I will be NaN or less. 2:04:45 And I simply, first of all, want to thank you all for your dedication and your service to this work into the continuum. 2:04:54 We are doing our very best to support your efforts and help to make those changes and improvements that we need in our system. 2:05:03 And so think, today are some lessons learned for us. And I have dared my staff to put anything out there without getting community outplay them. And our focus has really been on partnerships this year. 2:05:16 So I hope you understand that Everything we do is with good intention and we're not perfect but we're going to keep getting better. And we can only do that with you all. I primarily wanted to thank Ben Applegate for his leadership. 2:05:32 I'm sorry that I missed him before he had to, to leave. But he's done a tremendous job. 2:05:39 And this carry those challenges. 2:05:42 And I want to thank him. And Richard, I want you to know that we're here too. 2:05:46 Work with you and really appreciate knowing that you're coming in as are. 2:05:52 Our next leader, we're very lucky to have, you had that role that we go into continuing our partnership in 20 21. 2:06:01 Last year, when this all started happening, none of us saw what was coming. 2:06:05 I think that as we overwhelm ourselves with all the difficulties that's before us, I hope that you will all just take a moment to remind yourself, what a fantastic job, individually and collectively, we've all been able to accomplish, because we all care about the work we do, and in this time, I feel very comfortable that, as needs arise, we've been able to collectively address them. 2:06:29 And so, you have helped, at NIST, immensely, launching, passing a policy that launched the expedited Housing Initiative, our partnership with our private philanthropy partners and the city, their investment towards expedited Housing Initiative. 2:06:46 Without it, we would not be able to try new things and test this new system innovations that would help lead to system wide change. 2:06:57 Yesterday, was my 17 month anniversary in this position. 2:07:02 And I will tell you, I've not forgotten any of the things any of you have told me from the very beginning. 2:07:07 We do need to move this. We need to get our homelessness numbers down, and we need to stop it. And I hope that you will all join us in partnership. 2:07:15 We are here to do the work of the continuum, and I hope that you'll see that. 2:07:21 And for all of you, I wish you a very warm and happy holiday season, Thank you so much for your work. 2:07:26 Thank you. 2:07:27 Thank you, Carolyn. Thank you. 2:07:32 Yes. 2:07:33 So, so, let me just say this. 2:07:37 Also cargos insistence. You've been there. Carolyn? 2:07:42 Everything that you have done and have tried to do, it's obvious. 2:07:48 It's apparent that you are thoughtful and intentional about the way you're, you're trying to move things forward and it's refreshing. And I think that everyone does appreciate everything that you're trying to do. And it's it's really convey through your, your top notch staff. So, and congratulations on your 17th month. 2:08:13 I was just making a comment about, that was just making that comment about aging. I'm sorry. 2:08:19 OK, I don't have my camera. And Richard, I kinda look like Santa Claus here with the white hair and everything. 2:08:27 So this lightening up, it's the right time. 2:08:33 So, I want to say to everyone that's still in attendance right now. Thank you, and happy holidays. 2:08:39 And we do have a meeting Friday. 2:08:46 I'll see you there. 2:08:48 Yes, the OCLC meeting is Friday. Any last comment for it, from anyone? 2:08:55 Yeah. 2:08:59 OK, then I'm looking for a motion to adjourn. Now I need a motion to adjourn when you complete the agenda. 2:09:07 Thank you. Everyone, and Happy Holidays. 2:09:21 Yeah? 2:09:25 Bye. 2:09:27 Yeah. RE-GENERATE TRANSCRIPTSAVE EDITS